Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 441

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Organizational identification: A conceptual and operational review

Edwards, Martin R.·2005·International Journal of Management Reviews

Abstract

There is a growing body of literature presenting the argument that processes of organizational identification (OI) are extremely important in helping to ensure that staff work towards the interests of the organization. There are, however, a number of problems with the way that the notion of OI has been conceptualized and operationalized in the extant literature. This paper examines how OI has been defined and measured over a number of decades. A number of problems are identified with how OI has been conceptualized by researchers, including, for example, issues about whether there is an affective element to identification and how the construct relates to organizational commitment. The paper also includes a review of previous approaches to measuring the concept of OI and raises some key problems with existing research tools. The paper concludes by arguing for a particular conceptualization of OI which helps to clarify the complex relationship between identification and organizational commitment, while at the same time accommodating previous definitions of the construct.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2005.00114.x

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 441

Metadata

Authors
Edwards, M. R.
Venue
International Journal of Management Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-12
Volume
7
Issue
4
Pages
207-230
ISSN
  • 1460-8545 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2370
OpenAlex
W2086483802
Cited by
441
References
4
FWCI
11.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.